0711.3653/st5.tex
1: \documentclass[]{JHEP3}   % 10pt is ignored!
2: 
3: \JHEPspecialurl{http://jhep.sissa.it/JOURNAL/JHEP3.tar.gz}
4: 
5: \usepackage{epsfig}
6: 
7: \newcommand{\ttbs}{\char'134}           % \backslash for \tt (Nucl.Phys. :)%
8: \newcommand\fverb{\setbox\pippobox=\hbox\bgroup\verb}
9: \newcommand\fverbdo{\egroup\medskip\noindent%
10:             \fbox{\unhbox\pippobox}\ }
11: \newcommand\fverbit{\egroup\item[\fbox{\unhbox\pippobox}]}
12: \newbox\pippobox
13: %
14: \def\tp{\hspace{-2pt}+\hspace{-2pt}}
15: \def\tm{\hspace{-2pt}-\hspace{-2pt}}
16: \def\tdm{\tilde{R}}
17: \def\tdr{\tilde{R}}
18: \newcommand{\lsim}{\mathrel{\raisebox{-.6ex}{$\stackrel{\textstyle<}{\sim}$}}}
19: \newcommand{\gsim}{\mathrel{\raisebox{-.6ex}{$\stackrel{\textstyle>}{\sim}$}}}
20: \vfuzz2pt % Don't report over-full v-boxes if over-edge is small
21: %\newcommand{\gsim}{\begin{array}{c}\sim\vspace{-21pt}\\> \end{array}}
22: \newcommand{\be}{\begin{eqnarray}}
23: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{eqnarray}}
24: 
25: 
26: %\usepackage{amsmath}
27: 
28: 
29: 
30: 
31: %%% ----------------------------------------------------------------------
32: \title{
33: \begin{flushright}
34: \normalsize{ FERMILAB-PUB-07-618-T\\FTUV 07-1105}
35: \end{flushright}
36: Self-accelerating solutions of scalar--tensor gravity}
37: \author{       {Gabriela Barenboim}\\
38: \normalsize\emph{Departament de F\'isica Te\`orica and IFIC, Universitat de
39: Val\`encia - CSIC}\\
40: \emph{Carrer Dr. Moliner 50, E-46100 Burjassot (Val\`encia), Spain}\\
41: Email: \email{gabriela.barenboim@uv.es}\\}
42: 
43: 
44: \author{\textbf{Joseph D. Lykken}\\
45: \normalsize\emph{Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory}\\
46: \emph{P.O. Box 500, Batavia, IL 60510, USA}\\
47: Email: \email{lykken@fnal.gov}}
48: 
49: 
50: 
51: 
52: %%%----------------------------------------------------------------------
53: 
54: 
55: \abstract{Scalar--tensor gravity is the simplest and best
56: understood modification of general relativity, consisting of
57: a real scalar field coupled directly to the Ricci scalar 
58: curvature. Models of this type have self-accelerating solutions. 
59: In an example inspired by string dilaton couplings, 
60: scalar--tensor gravity coupled to ordinary matter exhibits a de Sitter
61: type expansion, even in the presence of a {\it negative} cosmological
62: constant whose magnitude exceeds that of the matter density.
63: This unusual behavior does not require phantoms, ghosts or other
64: exotic sources. More generally, we show that any expansion history
65: can be interpreted as arising partly or entirely from scalar--tensor
66: gravity. To distinguish any quintessence or inflation model from
67: its scalar--tensor variants, we use the fact that scalar--tensor models imply
68: deviations of the post-Newtonian parameters of general relativity,
69: and time variation of the Newton's gravitational coupling $G$. 
70: We emphasize that next-generation probes of modified GR and the time variation of $G$
71: are an essential complement to dark energy probes based on luminosity-distance
72: measurements. 
73: }
74: 
75: \keywords{cosmology, quintessence, dark energy, inflation}
76: 
77: 
78: %%% ----------------------------------------------------------------------
79: \begin{document}
80: 
81: %%% ----------------------------------------------------------------------
82: 
83: \section{Introduction}
84: 
85: There are three phenomenological approaches to explaining the
86: accelerating expansion of the universe.
87: The first is a positive cosmological constant whose magnitude
88: (considered as vacuum energy) somewhat 
89: exceeds the current matter density \cite{Weinberg:1988cp}.
90: The second is to introduce dynamical dark energy, usually in the form
91: of an ultralight quintessence scalar field \cite{Ratra:1987rm}-\cite{Copeland:2006wr}
92: The third is to
93: modify gravity so as to produce 
94: self-accelerating solutions \cite{Dvali:2000hr}-\cite{Carena:2006yr};
95: usually such solutions can be regarded as modifying the left-hand side
96: of the Einstein equations of motion in such a way as to simulate
97: a dark energy source on the right-hand side of these equations.
98: 
99: Scalar--tensor models \cite{Brans:1961sx}-\cite{Nordtvedt:1970uv}
100: can be regarded as a combination of
101: the latter two approaches. General relativity is modified by
102: a real scalar field $\theta (x)$ that couples directly to the
103: Ricci scalar curvature $R$. If the vacuum expectation value
104: of $\theta $ is dynamically evolving today, then the Einstein
105: equations are modified in a nonlinear way and exhibit new types
106: of solutions. In the absence of sources scalar--tensor models are 
107: classically equivalent to higher derivative modified gravity models based on a
108: nonlinear function $f(R)$, but this equivalence almost certainly
109: does not hold in realistic contexts. In fact scalar--tensor models
110: have a big advantage over other approaches to modified gravity,
111: in that it is transparent to identify regimes in these models
112: that are weakly--coupled and free of ghosts, violations of
113: the dominant energy condition, and other pathologies.
114: 
115: The existence of self-accelerating solutions of scalar--tensor
116: gravity models has already received considerable 
117: attention \cite{EspositoFarese:2000ij}-\cite{Demianski:2007mz}.
118: Strong observational constraints on such scalar--tensor cosmologies
119: have been derived and discussed in the 
120: literature \cite{Riazuelo:2001mg}-\cite{Coc:2006rt}.
121: Our purpose here is to exhibit some simple analytic solutions
122: that demonstrate the promise, weaknesses and generality of
123: accelerated expansion from scalar--tensor gravity. Although
124: we will focus on the connection to dark energy, most
125: of our analysis is also relevant for building models of
126: primordial inflation. 
127: 
128: In all of our examples the real scalar is ultralight.
129: There are two known motivations for such fields. The first
130: is string theory, in which the low energy effective action
131: can exhibit a massless dilaton and other massless moduli
132: fields. These generally have exponential couplings to
133: the Ricci scalar. They may or may not have direct couplings
134: to matter; when they do have such couplings, these may be
135: sufficiently universal to satisfy the very strong constraints
136: from equivalence principle tests \cite{Carroll:1998zi}.
137: The second motivation for
138: ultralight scalars (or pseudoscalars) are the pseudo-Nambu
139: Goldstone bosons of spontaneously broken global symmetries
140: that have an additional breaking due to nonperturbative
141: effects or to a weak explicit 
142: breaking \cite{Hill:1988vm}-\cite{Frieman:1995pm}.
143: In simple examples the
144: scalar potential of such PNGB's respects a discrete periodic
145: remnant of their original shift symmetry. We will assume
146: that scalar--tensor gravity implementations of this idea
147: imply periodic functions of $\theta$ coupling to $R$.
148: 
149: 
150: 
151: 
152: \section{Scalar--tensor theories}
153: 
154: Scalar--tensor theories are most simply defined as conventional general relativity
155: with a real scalar field coupled directly to the Ricci curvature. Viable models
156: of this type must have weak couplings between the scalar and conventional
157: matter or radiation. In the approximation where the scalar is decoupled from matter,
158: a general model can be defined in the Jordan frame:
159: \be\label{eqn:Jordanaction}
160: S &=& S_{\rm grav}(g_{\mu\nu},\theta ) + S_{\rm scalar}(g_{\mu\nu},\theta ) 
161: + S_{\rm matter}(g_{\mu\nu},\psi_{\rm matter}) \; ;\\
162: S_{\rm grav} &=& -\frac{k^2}{4}\int d^4x\sqrt{-g} \;D(\theta )R \; ;\\
163: S_{\rm scalar} &=& \int d^4x\sqrt{-g}\; 
164: \left[ \frac{1}{2}Z(\theta )g^{\mu\nu}\partial_{\mu}\theta
165: \partial_{\nu}\theta - V(\theta )\right] \; .\\
166: \ee
167: where $k^2 = 1/4\pi G$, $\theta (x)$ is the scalar field rescaled by $k$
168: to be dimensionless, $D(\theta )$, $Z(\theta )$ and $V(\theta )$
169: are arbitrary functions, and $\psi_{\rm matter}$ denotes generic matter
170: and radiation. We use the metric signature $(+1$,$-1$,$-1$,$-1)$ and 
171: Wald's convention for the sign of the Riemann curvature \cite{Wald}.
172: 
173: \subsection{frames}
174: At the classical level, one is free to perform arbitrary rescalings
175: of the metric field and the scalar, thus obtaining many other frames
176: that are classically equivalent to the 
177: Jordan frame \cite{Capozziello:1996xg}-\cite{Faraoni:1999hp}.
178: For example,
179: $\theta$ can be redefined so as to make $Z(\theta )/k^2=1$,
180: giving a conventional kinetic term. However this frame is 
181: problematic if the original $Z(\theta )$ has zeros; note that
182: $Z\to 0$ is an indication that the scalar is becoming either
183: strongly coupled or nondynamical.
184: 
185: A conformal transformation of the metric can always be
186: found such that in the new frame $D(\theta ) = 1$. This transformation to the
187: Einstein frame recovers the conventional Einstein-Hilbert action,
188: but introduces a direct coupling between the scalar field and matter
189: in $S_{\rm matter}$. This transformation is also problematic if
190: $D(\theta )$ has zeros, an indication that gravity is becoming
191: strongly coupled.
192: 
193: By a combination of a conformal transformation and a redefinition
194: of the scalar, it is also possible to find a frame where
195: $Z(\theta ) =0$. Since the scalar is then nondynamical, it
196: can be eliminated by solving the constraint provided by its
197: equation of motion. Thus in this frame the scalar--tensor theory
198: becomes an $f(R)$ theory of modified general relativity. 
199: 
200: For most purposes the physics of scalar--tensor theories is more
201: transparent in the Jordan frame. Avoiding other frames also
202: avoids the difficult question of the status of these classical field
203: redefinitions in the full quantum theory. 
204: 
205: \subsection{equations of motion}
206: 
207: In the absence of matter, the equations of motion
208: for the general scalar--tensor theory with a Friedmann-Robertson-Walker
209: metric ansatz become:
210: \be\label{eqn:steoma}
211: H^2 &=& \frac{Z}{3k^2D}\dot{\theta}^2
212: -\frac{\dot{D}}{D}H + \frac{2}{3k^2D}V \; ;\\
213: \label{eqn:steomb}
214: \dot{H} &=& \frac{\dot{D}}{2D}H - \frac{\ddot{D}}{2D}
215: -\frac{Z}{k^2D}\dot{\theta}^2 \; ;\\
216: \label{eqn:thetaeom}
217: 0 &=& \ddot{\theta} + 3H\dot{\theta}
218: +\frac{1}{2}\frac{Z'}{Z}\dot{\theta}^2
219: +\frac{k^2}{4}\frac{D'}{Z}R + \frac{V'}{Z} \; ,
220: \ee
221: where a prime indicates variation with respect
222: to the scalar field $\theta$. Here
223: $H = \dot{a}/a$ is the Hubble expansion rate,
224: and the Ricci curvature is given by
225: \be
226: R = -6(\dot{H} + 2H^2) \; .
227: \ee
228: We have assumed that the spatial curvature in the FRW
229: ansatz vanishes.
230: 
231: The third equation of motion (\ref{eqn:thetaeom}) is redundant to the
232: first two, which together form a coupled set of nonlinear differential
233: equations for $H(t)$ and $\theta (t)$.
234: The first equation of motion is the Friedmann equation
235: for scalar-tensor cosmology in the absence of matter and radiation.
236: Combining it with the second equation of motion, one can
237: derive a conventional continuity equation:
238: \be
239: \dot{\rho_{\rm eff}} + 3H(\rho_{\rm eff} + p_{\rm eff}) = 0 \; ,
240: \ee
241: where the conserved energy density $\rho_{\rm eff}$ and the corresponding
242: pressure $p_{\rm eff}$ are given by:
243: \be\label{eqn:fform}
244: \rho_{\rm eff} &=& \frac{3}{2}k^2H^2 \; ;\\
245: p_{\rm eff} &=& -\frac{1}{2}Z\dot{\theta}^2 - V - k^2\dot{H}
246: +\frac{3}{2}k^2\left[ H\dot{D} + H^2(D-1) \right] \; .
247: \ee
248: Of course the first relation (\ref{eqn:fform}) is a just a rewriting
249: of the Friedmann equation in its conventional form
250: $H^2 = 2\rho /3k^2$. It is important to keep in mind that
251: $\rho_{\rm eff}$ and $p_{\rm eff}$ differ from the
252: flat space energy density and pressure:
253: \be
254: \rho_{\rm eff} &=&  \rho + \Delta\rho \; ; \\
255: p_{\rm eff} &=& =  p + \Delta p \; ,
256: \ee
257: where
258: \be
259: \rho &=& \frac{1}{2}Z\dot{\theta}^2 + V \; ;\\
260: p &=& \frac{1}{2}Z\dot{\theta}^2 - V \; ;\\
261: \Delta\rho &=& \frac{3}{2}k^2H^2 - \frac{1}{2}Z\dot{\theta}^2 - V \; ;\\
262: \Delta p &=& \frac{k^2}{2}\left[ \ddot{D} + 2H\dot{D}
263: +(2\dot{H}+3H^2)(D-1) \right] \; .
264: \ee
265: 
266: The effective equation of state for the scalar is given by
267: \be
268: p_{\rm eff} &=& w_{\rm eff}\rho_{\rm eff} \; ;\\
269: w_{\rm eff} &=& -1 - \frac{2}{3}\frac{\dot{H}}{H^2} \; .
270: \ee
271: Assuming a quintessence role for the scalar $\theta$,
272: the effective parameter $w_{\rm eff}$ would be what is extracted,
273: \textit{e.g.}, from Type Ia supernovae observations.
274: There is no simple relation between $w_{\rm eff}$
275: and $w = p/\rho$.
276: 
277: 
278: \subsection{tracking solutions for scalar-tensor cosmologies}
279: 
280: The FRW solutions that are of greatest cosmological interest are
281: those for which the time evolution of the scalar field $\theta$
282: tracks the expansion rate. The simplest ansatz for this kind
283: of behavior is
284: \be\label{eqn:thetaansatz}
285: \dot{\theta} = -bH \; ,
286: \ee
287: where $b$ is a constant. We will restrict ourselves to solutions
288: of this type, although more complicated scenarios are certainly
289: possible.
290: 
291: Imposing the ansatz (\ref{eqn:thetaansatz}), the equations of
292: motion (\ref{eqn:steoma}-\ref{eqn:steomb}) become over-constrained.
293: Thus solutions of the desired type are only obtained
294: if the input functions $D(\theta )$, $Z(\theta )$, and
295: $V(\theta )$ obey a constraint, given by
296: \be\label{eqn:FDVconstraint}
297: Z = \frac{3k^2}{b^2}(D - bD'- {\mathit v}) \; ,
298: \ee
299: where we have introduced the dimensionless notation:
300: \be
301: V  \equiv \frac{3}{2}{\mathit v}k^2H^2 \; .
302: \ee
303: The equations of motion can then be solved for the effective scalar
304: equation of state parameter $w_{\rm eff}$:
305: \be\label{eqn:genwexp}
306: w_{\rm eff} = 1 - \frac{2}{3} \;\frac{6{\mathit v}+2bD'-b^2D''}{2D - bD'}
307: \; ,
308: \ee
309: in terms of which the Hubble rate is given by:
310: \be
311: H = H_0\,{\rm exp}\,\frac{1}{b}\int^{\theta} 
312: d\theta' \left[ 1+w(\theta' )\right]
313: \; .
314: \ee
315: 
316: Note that, taking $Z$, $D$ and ${\mathit v}$
317: as functionals of $\theta /b$, a rescaling of $b$ can be
318: undone by a rescaling of $\theta$ (which also implies
319: an overall rescaling of the kinetic function $Z$).
320: Thus we can take $b=1$ from now on with no loss of
321: generality, writing
322: \be\label{eqn:newfeq}
323: z = Z/k^2 = 3(D - D') - 2{\mathit v} \; ,
324: \ee
325: and
326: \be\label{eqn:genswexp}
327: w_{\rm eff} = 1 - \frac{2}{3} \;\frac{6{\mathit v}+2D'-D''}{2D - D'}
328: \; .
329: \ee
330:  
331: There is no known reason why the coupling functionals
332: $Z(\theta )$, $D(\theta )$ and $V(\theta )$ should obey the
333: constraint (\ref{eqn:FDVconstraint}) exactly.  However it is
334: certainly plausible that they satisfy this relation approximately
335: during a certain cosmological epoch.
336: 
337: 
338: \subsection{phantoms, ghosts and strong coupling}
339: 
340: Generic scalar--tensor lagrangians will lead to behaviors
341: that are unphysical, unstable or singular at the classical level,
342: the quantum level, or both. A partial
343: list of possibilities includes
344: \begin{itemize}
345: \item If $Z(\theta ) < 0$ during any epoch, the solution
346: has a kinetic ghost. In the cosmological context kinetic ghosts
347: are known as phantoms \cite{Caldwell:1999ew}-\cite{Dabrowski:2003jm}. 
348: They violate the weak energy condition
349: $p + \rho \ge 0$ and the dominant energy condition
350: $\rho \ge |p|$. Phantoms generically lead to singularities, 
351: dangerous instabilities, and pathologies in the ultraviolet
352: behavior of the underlying field theory \cite{Cline:2003gs,Rubakov:2006pn}. 
353: A successful scalar--tensor
354: model with a phantom epoch would have to address all of these
355: difficulties.
356: \item If $D(\theta ) < 0$ during any epoch, then the graviton
357: becomes a kinetic ghost. Theories of this type are believed
358: to be unphysical \cite{Carena:2006yr}.
359: \end{itemize}
360: 
361: Our philosophy will be to avoid such behaviors. We want
362: to understand the cosmological significance of scalar-tensor
363: theories \textit{per se}, not as examples of other exotica.
364: 
365: Time variation of the vacuum expectation value of $D$
366: corresponds to a variation in the effective strength of
367: the gravitational coupling. The magnitude of $\dot{D}$
368: is subject to strong observational bounds during certain
369: epochs, especially the present day \cite{Bertotti:2003rm}-\cite{Zahn:2002rr}. 
370: $D$ approaching zero
371: corresponds to gravity becoming strong.
372: Time variation
373: of the vacuum expectation value of $Z$, after a rescaling,
374: corresponds to changing the self-coupling of the scalar
375: field $\theta$, as well as its couplings to matter. The magnitude
376: of these latter couplings are subject to strong observational
377: upper bounds, at least during the present epoch. $Z$ approaching zero
378: corresponds to the scalar sector becoming strongly coupled,
379: a possibility reminiscent of the discussions in \cite{Luty}.
380: 
381: When we exhibit solutions that have $D \to 0$ and/or $Z\to 0$
382: at some time in the past, we will consider these as a 
383: breakdown of the modelling of the physics due to scalar-tensor
384: gravity sector becoming strongly coupled. 
385: 
386: 
387: \section{De Sitter expansion with a negative cosmological constant}
388: 
389: Even without resorting to phantoms or other exotica, the
390: scalar-tensor equations of motion have many remarkable solutions.
391: One dramatic example is obtained by asking for a de Sitter solution,
392: \textit{i.e.} $H =$ constant and $w_{\rm eff}  = -1$. We will also
393: suppose that the scalar potential consists entirely of a cosmological
394: constant: ${\mathit v}(\theta ) = {\mathit v_0}$. Inserting these
395: ansatze into (\ref{eqn:genswexp}) yields a constraint on the
396: coupling $D(\theta )$:
397: \be
398: D'' - 5D' + 6(D-v_0) = 0 \; .
399: \ee
400: The solution of this constraint with the additional properties
401: $D(0) = 1$, $D'(0) = 0$ is given by:
402: \be\label{eqn:stds}
403: D(\theta ) &=& v_0 + 3(1-v_0){\rm e}^{2\theta} -2(1-v_0){\rm e}^{3\theta}
404: \; ; \\
405: z(\theta ) &=& 3(1-v_0)\left( -3{\rm e}^{2\theta} + 4{\rm e}^{3\theta} \right)
406: \; ,
407: \ee
408: where we have also assumed a form for the kinetic function satisfying
409: the constraint (\ref{eqn:newfeq}).
410: 
411: It is easily verified that the scalar--tensor theory defined by
412: (\ref{eqn:stds}) gives an exactly de Sitter solution $H=H_0$,
413: $w_{\rm eff} = -1$, for any value of the cosmological constant $v_0$,
414: including a negative cosmological constant. Furthermore, provided
415: that $v_0 < 1$, there is an epoch which includes the present
416: time ($\theta = 0$) where both $D(\theta )$ and $Z(\theta )$ are
417: positive. Thus the cosmology that we are describing does not
418: rely on exotic matter or ghosts. It does carry the price that
419: the description breaks down at some time both in the past and
420: in the future, where strong coupling occurs in the scalar--tensor
421: sector.
422: 
423: \begin{figure}
424: 
425: \centerline{\epsfxsize 3.75 truein \epsfbox {HdsAds.eps} }
426: \caption
427: {\label{fig:HdsAds}
428: The squared Hubble rate as a function of
429: the scalar field expectation value $\theta$. $H$ is normalized such
430: that $H = H_0$ when $\theta = 0$. The scalar--tensor
431: theory is defined with a negative cosmological
432: constant $v_0 = -1$ (\textit{i.e.} a constant scalar potential
433: $V = -\frac{3}{2}k^2H_0^2$). Matter has been added corresponding to $\Omega_m = 0.25$.
434: }
435: \end{figure}
436: 
437: 
438: The solutions are even more interesting if we add conventional
439: matter sources. Since the scale factor $a$ is proportional
440: to exp$(-\theta )$, conventional matter will appear on the
441: right hand side of the Friedmann equation as a rescaled energy density
442: \be
443: \rho_m = \Omega_m {\rm e}^{3\theta } \; .
444: \ee
445: The exact solution to the equations of motion is
446: \be
447: \frac{H^2}{H_0^2} =
448: 1 + \frac{\Omega_m}{(1-v_0)}\;
449: {\rm log}\left[ v_0 + (1-v_0){\rm e}^{3\theta } \right]
450: \; .
451: \ee
452: The resulting behavior is shown in Figure \ref{fig:HdsAds},
453: for the particular case of $\Omega_m = 0.25$ and
454: negative cosmological constant $v_0 = -1$. Positive
455: $\theta$ corresponds to the past, negative $\theta$ to
456: the future. In the domain plotted both $D(\theta )$ and
457: $Z(\theta )$ are strictly positive.
458: 
459:  For positive $\theta$, the Hubble rate is nearly constant,
460: \textit{i.e.} de Sitter-like, and slightly decreasing due to the
461: matter source. However in the future the negative cosmological
462: constant begins to dominate, and $H^2$ goes rapidly to
463: zero, transitioning from a nearly de Sitter metric to an anti-de
464: Sitter metric. Of course, a tiny negative cosmological constant
465: will always assert itself at some point in the future when other
466: sources have diluted. What is remarkable here is that the
467: negative cosmological constant is of the same magnitude
468: as the chimeric positive vacuum energy mocked up by the
469: effects of scalar--tensor gravity!
470: 
471: As expected, in the case where $v_0$ is positive and 
472: less than one, the expansion is de Sitter-like at $\theta = 0$
473: and becomes increasing de Sitter-like in the future.
474: In this case the effects of scalar--tensor gravity and real
475: positive vacuum energy conspire together. In the special
476: case $v_0 =1$, the solution reduces back to ordinary
477: inflating general relativity. 
478: 
479: The coupling functions $D$ and $z$ shown
480: in (\ref{eqn:stds}) have the form of linear combinations of
481: exponentials of $\theta$.  These are reminiscent of 
482: the effective low energy action of string theory, with
483: $\theta$ representing the dilaton or other related moduli
484: fields, and higher powers of exp$(\theta )$ representing
485: higher orders in the string coupling. 
486: 
487: Damour and Polyakov examined long ago \cite{Damour:1994zq} the
488: possibility of a string dilaton or similar modulus surviving as
489: a massless field in a phenomenolgically realistic string
490: compactification.  They pointed out that very stringent 
491: observational constraints on this scenario
492: can be satisified via a dynamical attraction to a local maximum
493: of $D(\theta )$. This is precisely what occurs in our example,
494: where $D$ has a local maximum at $\theta = 0$.
495: 
496: In order to avoid the strongest observational bounds on the time
497: variation of $G$, $\theta$ would have to be very close to
498: this local maximum today. For example the constraint from the
499: Cassini spacecraft \cite{Bertotti:2003rm} 
500: requires that $\theta \le 0.002$ today,
501: for the model with a negative cosmological constant $v_0 = -1$.
502: Even with such a tuning the model is problematical as
503: an explanation of the present day accelerated expansion,
504: since already at a redshift of 0.1 $\dot{G}/G$ is twice as
505: large as it is now. 
506: 
507: \section{PNGB gravity}
508: 
509: In the previous example the form of the coupling functions
510: was inspired by the dilaton and other moduli, the massless real scalar
511: fields of string theory. The other well-motivated approach to
512: very light scalars or pseudoscalars are pseudo-Nambu Goldstone
513: bosons of a spontaneously broken $U(1)$ symmetry. The PNGBs
514: have a shift symmetry which prevents them from appearing in the
515: coupling functions $D$ and $Z$ or from having a nontrivial potential $V$.
516: However nonperturbative effects or a weak explicit breaking can change
517: this picture. The simplest assumption is that $D$, $Z$ and $V$ are
518: restricted to be periodic functions of $\theta$, preserving a
519: discrete remnant $\theta \to \theta + 2\pi$ of the original
520: shift symmetry.
521: 
522: An interesting example of a scalar-tensor model of this type is
523: defined by
524: \be
525: D(\theta ) &=& 1 + \lambda ({\rm cos}\,\theta -1) \; ;\\
526: Z(\theta ) &=& \frac{1}{2}\lambda k^2 ({\rm cos}\,\theta
527: +{\rm sin}\,\theta ) \; ;\\
528: V  &=& \frac{3}{2}k^2H_0^2\left[ 1 + \lambda \left(
529: \frac{5}{6}({\rm cos}\,\theta + {\rm sin}\,\theta ) -1 \right)
530: \right]
531: \; .
532: \ee
533: 
534: When the dimensionless parameter $\lambda$ is taken to be small,
535: $\dot{G}/G$ effects are suppressed. However since the kinetic
536: coupling $Z$ is proportional to $\lambda$, taking $\lambda$ small
537: also increases the strength of $\lambda$ self-couplings as well
538: as any couplings of the PNGB $\theta$ to ordinary matter.
539: This trade-off between suppressing variations of $G$ and 
540: suppressing couplings to matter is a general feature of
541: scalar--tensor models.
542: 
543: In this model
544: the effective equation of state parameter $w_{\rm eff}$ is
545: exactly -1, giving a de Sitter solution. For small $\lambda$
546: this solution is obviously a perturbation of the standard
547: de Sitter solution arising from a positive cosmological constant.
548: The coupling $D(\theta )$ is positive for all values of $\theta$.
549: The kinetic coupling $Z(\theta )$ vanishes at $\theta \simeq 2.35$,
550: corresponding to a redshift of about 10,
551: indicating that the PNGB sector becomes strongly coupled.
552: 
553: Taking $\theta = 0$ to represent the present day, 
554: we note that $D(0) = 1$ and that $D$ is at a local maximum.
555: We can take a reasonably small value of $\lambda$,
556: $\lambda = 0.05$, and investigate the constraints on the model.
557: All of the present day bounds $\dot{G}/G$ and post-Newtonian
558: parameters are satisfied, provided we have tuned the present
559: day to coincide with $\theta = 0$ within about 3 per cent
560: accuracy. Furthermore in this model $\dot{G}/G$ oscillates,
561: so at no time in the past did $G$ differ from it's current
562: value by more than 10 percent.
563: 
564: \section{General case}
565: 
566: As noted in the introduction, a remarkable feature of
567: scalar--tensor gravity is that it allows one to obtain
568: \textit{any} equation of state starting from \textit{any} scalar potential,
569: via a suitable choice of the coupling functions $D$ and $Z$.
570: The major caveat is that the required $D$ and $Z$ may not be
571: positive, so only a subset of such models are manifestly physical.
572: 
573: \begin{figure}
574: 
575: \centerline{\epsfxsize 3.75 truein \epsfbox {p1b.eps} }
576: \caption {\label{fig:p1b}
577: The gravitational coupling functional $D(\theta )$ as a function of 
578: $\theta$.}
579: \end{figure}
580: 
581: By the same token, one can obtain any equation of state starting
582: from any choice of $D(\theta )$. As an example, suppose that we
583: want to reproduce the oscillatory equation of state of the
584: Slinky quintessence model \cite{Barenboim:2005np}-\cite{Barenboim:2007tu}:
585: \be\label{eqn:slinkyw}
586: w_{\rm eff} = -{\rm cos}\,2\theta \; .
587: \ee
588: At the same time, we will assume a simple oscillatory term
589: in the coupling $D$:
590: \be\label{eqn:slinkyD}
591: D(\theta ) = 1 + \lambda\, {\rm cos}^2\theta \; ,
592: \ee
593: where we have in mind that $\lambda$ is a small parameter.
594: A scalar--tensor model with the desired equation of state
595: is then obtained by substituting 
596: (\ref{eqn:slinkyD}) into (\ref{eqn:FDVconstraint}) after first
597: substituting (\ref{eqn:slinkyD}) and (\ref{eqn:slinkyw})
598: into the following expression for $v(\theta )$:
599: \be
600: v(\theta ) = \frac{1}{6}D'' - \frac{5}{6}D'
601: +D +\frac{1}{4}(1+w_{\rm eff})(D'-2D) \; .
602: \ee
603: 
604: \begin{figure}
605: 
606: \centerline{\epsfxsize 3.75 truein \epsfbox {p2b.eps} }
607: \caption {\label{fig:p2b}
608: The kinetic functional $z(\theta )$ as a function of 
609: $\theta$.}
610: \end{figure}
611: 
612: 
613: Taking $\lambda = 0.1$, we obtain a scalar--tensor version
614: of the Slinky model for which $D(\theta )$ and $Z(\theta )$
615: are oscillatory and strictly positive for all values
616: of $\theta$, as shown in Figures \ref{fig:p1b} and \ref{fig:p2b}.
617: The model satisfies all
618: the present day constraints on $\dot{G}/G$ and the post-Newtonian
619: parameters, provided that $\theta$ is tuned to be within about
620: 2 per cent of a local minimum or maximum. Because $\dot{G}/G$
621: is oscillatory, the magnitude of $G$ never varies by more than
622: 9 per cent from its current value.
623: 
624: 
625: 
626: \section{Conclusion}
627: 
628: We have seen that scalar-tensor gravity models can have
629: remarkably simple self-accelerating solutions, without resorting
630: to phantoms or other ghosts. These solutions are made possible
631: by the fact that the conserved energy associated to the scalar
632: is not the conventional energy that one would read off from the lagrangian
633: in the flat space limit. 
634: 
635: As we have seen, this self-accelerating
636: feature can even overcome, for a time, the effects of a negative
637: cosmological constant of similar magnitude. In such a scenario,
638: our immediate cosmological future exactly contradicts what one
639: would predict from a naive extrapolation of the current expansion.
640: Although the model we exhibited was not entirely realistic,
641: it has an intriguing connection to previous attempts to 
642: construct realistic string models with ultralight moduli. 
643: 
644: Scalar-tensor models are very constrained by observational data.
645: It does not appear likely that one could account for
646: dark energy entirely from the effects of scalar-tensor gravity,
647: especially in a framework where the gravity sector is manifestly
648: weakly coupled and ghost--free.
649: 
650: However we gave two examples of realistic models where the novel
651: properties of scalar-tensor gravity play an important role
652: in the current accelerated expansion. These models are somewhat
653: tuned in order to satisfy present day limits on the time variation
654: of $G$. They predict interesting variations of $G$, on the order
655: or 10\% , at earlier times. Improved CMB \cite{Zahn:2002rr}
656: or neutron star \cite{Thorsett:1996fr} constraints would directly
657: test such scenarios, as would galaxy cluster based tests of
658: modified gravity \cite{Zhang:2007nk,Schmidt:2007vj}.
659: 
660: More generally, our examples show the importance of using
661: a broad-based observational approach to dark energy.
662: The ambitious Stage IV dark energy probes currently
663: planned \cite{Albrecht:2006um} are certainly not sufficient
664: by themselves \cite{Boisseau:2000pr,Capozziello:2007iu}
665: to disentangle scalar-tensor effects from
666: quintessence and other scenarios. 
667: 
668: The self-accelerating properties of scalar-tensor models
669: look promising for models of primordial inflation.
670: It appears that such models could have
671: virtues similar to models of hybrid inflation \cite{GarciaBellido:1995fz,Linde:1993cn}.
672: Variations of $G$ at times prior to Big Bang Nucleosynthesis are
673: hardly constrained. In this arena it also seems more promising
674: to forge a concrete link
675: between scalar-tensor gravity and string theory.
676: 
677: \subsection*{Acknowledgments}
678: The authors are grateful to Chris Hill
679: and Jos\'e Santiago for useful comments. 
680: GB acknowledges support from the Spanish MEC and FEDER under 
681: Contract FPA 2005/1678,
682: and the Generalitat Valenciana under Contract GV05/267.
683: Fermilab is operated by the Fermi Research Alliance LLC under
684: contact DE-AC02-07CH11359 with the U.S. Dept. of Energy.
685: 
686: 
687: 
688: \newpage
689: 
690: % ------------------------------------------------------------------------
691: 
692: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
693: 
694: 
695: %%%%%%% cosmological constant
696: 
697: \bibitem{Weinberg:1988cp}
698:   S.~Weinberg,
699:   %``The cosmological constant problem,''
700:   Rev.\ Mod.\ Phys.\  {\bf 61}, 1 (1989).
701:   %%CITATION = RMPHA,61,1;%%
702: 
703: %%%%% quintessence
704: 
705: \bibitem{Ratra:1987rm}
706:   B.~Ratra and P.~J.~E.~Peebles,
707:   %``Cosmological Consequences of a Rolling Homogeneous Scalar Field,''
708:   Phys.\ Rev.\  D {\bf 37}, 3406 (1988).
709:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D37,3406;%%
710: 
711: \bibitem{Peebles:1987ek}
712:   P.~J.~E.~Peebles and B.~Ratra,
713:   %``Cosmology with a Time Variable Cosmological Constant,''
714:   Astrophys.\ J.\  {\bf 325}, L17 (1988).
715:   %%CITATION = ASJOA,325,L17;%%
716: 
717: \bibitem{Carroll:1998zi}  
718: S.~M.~Carroll,  
719: %``Quintessence and the rest of the world,''  
720: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf 81}, 3067 (1998)  
721: [arXiv:astro-ph/9806099]. 
722: %%CITATION = PRLTA,81,3067;%%
723: 
724: \bibitem{Copeland:2006wr}
725:   E.~J.~Copeland, M.~Sami and S.~Tsujikawa,
726:   %``Dynamics of dark energy,''
727:   Int.\ J.\ Mod.\ Phys.\  D {\bf 15}, 1753 (2006)
728:   [arXiv:hep-th/0603057].
729:   %%CITATION = IMPAE,D15,1753;%%
730: 
731: %%% modified gravity
732: 
733: \bibitem{Dvali:2000hr}
734:   G.~R.~Dvali, G.~Gabadadze and M.~Porrati,
735:   %``4D gravity on a brane in 5D Minkowski space,''
736:   Phys.\ Lett.\  B {\bf 485}, 208 (2000)
737:   [arXiv:hep-th/0005016].
738:   %%CITATION = PHLTA,B485,208;%%
739: 
740: \bibitem{Carroll:2003wy}
741:   S.~M.~Carroll, V.~Duvvuri, M.~Trodden and M.~S.~Turner,
742:   %``Is cosmic speed-up due to new gravitational physics?,''
743:   Phys.\ Rev.\  D {\bf 70}, 043528 (2004)
744:   [arXiv:astro-ph/0306438].
745:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D70,043528;%%
746: 
747: \bibitem{Dolgov:2003px}
748:   A.~D.~Dolgov and M.~Kawasaki,
749:   %``Can modified gravity explain accelerated cosmic expansion?,''
750:   Phys.\ Lett.\  B {\bf 573}, 1 (2003)
751:   [arXiv:astro-ph/0307285].
752:   %%CITATION = PHLTA,B573,1;%%
753: 
754: \bibitem{Nojiri:2003ft}
755:   S.~Nojiri and S.~D.~Odintsov,
756:   %``Modified gravity with negative and positive powers of the curvature:
757:   %Unification of the inflation and of the cosmic acceleration,''
758:   Phys.\ Rev.\  D {\bf 68}, 123512 (2003)
759:   [arXiv:hep-th/0307288].
760:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D68,123512;%%
761: 
762:  \bibitem{Mena:2005ta}
763:   O.~Mena, J.~Santiago and J.~Weller,
764:   %``Constraining inverse curvature gravity with supernovae,''
765:   Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf 96}, 041103 (2006)
766:   [arXiv:astro-ph/0510453].
767:   %%CITATION = PRLTA,96,041103;%%
768: 
769: \bibitem{Nojiri:2006ri}
770:   S.~Nojiri and S.~D.~Odintsov,
771:   %``Introduction to modified gravity and gravitational alternative for dark
772:   %energy,''
773:   Int.\ J.\ Geom.\ Meth.\ Mod.\ Phys.\  {\bf 4}, 115 (2007)
774:   [arXiv:hep-th/0601213].
775:   %%CITATION = 00436,4,115;%%
776: 
777: \bibitem{Carena:2006yr}
778:   M.~S.~Carena, J.~Lykken, M.~Park and J.~Santiago,
779:   %``Self-accelerating warped braneworlds,''
780:   Phys.\ Rev.\  D {\bf 75}, 026009 (2007)
781:   [arXiv:hep-th/0611157].
782:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D75,026009;%%
783: 
784: %%% Brans-Dicke
785: 
786: \bibitem{Brans:1961sx}
787:   C.~Brans and R.~H.~Dicke,
788:   %``Mach's principle and a relativistic theory of gravitation,''
789:   Phys.\ Rev.\  {\bf 124}, 925 (1961).
790:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,124,925;%%
791: 
792: \bibitem{Bergmann:1968ve}
793:   P.~G.~Bergmann,
794:   %``Comments On The Scalar Tensor Theory,''
795:   Int.\ J.\ Theor.\ Phys.\  {\bf 1}, 25 (1968).
796:   %%CITATION = IJTPB,1,25;%%
797: 
798: \bibitem{Wagoner:1970vr}
799:   R.~V.~Wagoner,
800:   %``Scalar tensor theory and gravitational waves,''
801:   Phys.\ Rev.\  D {\bf 1}, 3209 (1970).
802:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D1,3209;%%
803: 
804: \bibitem{Nordtvedt:1970uv}
805:   K.~J.~Nordtvedt,
806:   %``PostNewtonian metric for a general class of scalar tensor gravitational
807:   %theories and observational consequences,''
808:   Astrophys.\ J.\  {\bf 161}, 1059 (1970).
809:   %%CITATION = ASJOA,161,1059;%%
810: 
811: 
812: %%%%%%%  accelerating solutions of scalar-tensor gravity
813: 
814: \bibitem{EspositoFarese:2000ij}
815:   G.~Esposito-Farese and D.~Polarski,
816:   %``Scalar-tensor gravity in an accelerating universe,''
817:   Phys.\ Rev.\  D {\bf 63}, 063504 (2001)
818:   [arXiv:gr-qc/0009034].
819:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D63,063504;%%
820: 
821: \bibitem{Faraoni:2004dn}
822:   V.~Faraoni,
823:   %``de Sitter attractors in generalized gravity,''
824:   Phys.\ Rev.\  D {\bf 70}, 044037 (2004)
825:   [arXiv:gr-qc/0407021].
826:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D70,044037;%%
827: 
828: \bibitem{Carvalho:2004ty}
829:   F.~C.~Carvalho and A.~Saa,
830:   %``Non-minimal coupling, exponential potentials and the w < -1 regime of  dark
831:   %energy,''
832:   Phys.\ Rev.\  D {\bf 70}, 087302 (2004)
833:   [arXiv:astro-ph/0408013].
834:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D70,087302;%%
835: 
836: \bibitem{Nojiri:2005pu}
837:   S.~Nojiri and S.~D.~Odintsov,
838:   %``Unifying phantom inflation with late-time acceleration: Scalar
839:   %phantom-non-phantom transition model and generalized holographic dark
840:   %energy,''
841:   Gen.\ Rel.\ Grav.\  {\bf 38}, 1285 (2006)
842:   [arXiv:hep-th/0506212].
843:   %%CITATION = GRGVA,38,1285;%%
844: 
845: \bibitem{Demianski:2007mz}
846:   M.~Demianski, E.~Piedipalumbo, C.~Rubano and P.~Scudellaro,
847:   %``Cosmological models in scalar tensor theories of gravity and observations:
848:   %a class of general solutions,''
849:   arXiv:0711.1043 [astro-ph].
850:   %%CITATION = ARXIV:0711.1043;%%
851: 
852: 
853: % constraints on scalar-tensor dark energy
854: 
855: \bibitem{Riazuelo:2001mg}
856:   A.~Riazuelo and J.~P.~Uzan,
857:   %``Cosmological observations in scalar-tensor quintessence,''
858:   Phys.\ Rev.\  D {\bf 66}, 023525 (2002)
859:   [arXiv:astro-ph/0107386].
860:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D66,023525;%%
861: 
862: \bibitem{Catena:2004ba}
863:   R.~Catena, N.~Fornengo, A.~Masiero, M.~Pietroni and F.~Rosati,
864:   %``Dark matter relic abundance and scalar-tensor dark energy,''
865:   Phys.\ Rev.\  D {\bf 70}, 063519 (2004)
866:   [arXiv:astro-ph/0403614].
867:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D70,063519;%%
868: 
869: \bibitem{Carroll:2004hc}
870:   S.~M.~Carroll, A.~De Felice and M.~Trodden,
871:   %``Can we be tricked into thinking that w is less than -1?,''
872:   Phys.\ Rev.\  D {\bf 71}, 023525 (2005)
873:   [arXiv:astro-ph/0408081].
874:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D71,023525;%%
875: 
876: \bibitem{Gannouji:2006jm}
877:   R.~Gannouji, D.~Polarski, A.~Ranquet and A.~A.~Starobinsky,
878:   %``Scalar-tensor models of normal and phantom dark energy,''
879:   JCAP {\bf 0609}, 016 (2006)
880:   [arXiv:astro-ph/0606287].
881:   %%CITATION = JCAPA,0609,016;%%
882: 
883: \bibitem{Coc:2006rt}
884:   A.~Coc, K.~A.~Olive, J.~P.~Uzan and E.~Vangioni,
885:   %``Big bang nucleosynthesis constraints on scalar-tensor theories of
886:   %gravity,''
887:   Phys.\ Rev.\  D {\bf 73}, 083525 (2006)
888:   [arXiv:astro-ph/0601299].
889:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D73,083525;%%
890: 
891: %%%%% PNGB
892: 
893: \bibitem{Hill:1988vm}
894:   C.~T.~Hill, D.~N.~Schramm and J.~N.~Fry,
895:   %``Cosmological structure formation from soft topological defects,''
896:   Comments Nucl.\ Part.\ Phys.\  {\bf 19}, 25 (1989).
897:   %%CITATION = CNPPA,19,25;%%
898: 
899: \bibitem{Freese:1990rb}
900:   K.~Freese, J.~A.~Frieman and A.~V.~Olinto,
901:   %``Natural inflation with pseudo - Nambu-Goldstone bosons,''
902:   Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf 65}, 3233 (1990).
903:   %%CITATION = PRLTA,65,3233;%%
904: 
905: \bibitem{Frieman:1991tu}  
906: J.~A.~Frieman, C.~T.~Hill and R.~Watkins, 
907: %``Late time cosmological phase transitions. 1. Particle physics models and  
908: %cosmic evolution,'' 
909: Phys.\ Rev.\  D {\bf 46}, 1226 (1992).  
910: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D46,1226;%%
911: 
912: \bibitem{Frieman:1995pm}
913:   J.~A.~Frieman, C.~T.~Hill, A.~Stebbins and I.~Waga,  
914: %``Cosmology with ultralight pseudo Nambu-Goldstone bosons,''  
915: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf 75}, 2077 (1995)  
916: [arXiv:astro-ph/9505060].  
917: %%CITATION = PRLTA,75,2077;%%
918: 
919: %%% Wald book
920: 
921: \bibitem{Wald}
922: R. Wald, {\sl ``General Relativity''}, University of Chicago Press,
923: 1984.
924: 
925: 
926: 
927: %%%%%%% frames
928: 
929: \bibitem{Capozziello:1996xg}
930:   S.~Capozziello, R.~de Ritis and A.~A.~Marino,
931:   %``Some aspects of the cosmological conformal equivalence between  *Jordan
932:   %frame* and *Einstein frame*,''
933:   Class.\ Quant.\ Grav.\  {\bf 14}, 3243 (1997)
934:   [arXiv:gr-qc/9612053].
935:   %%CITATION = CQGRD,14,3243;%%
936: 
937: \bibitem{Dick:1998ke}
938:   R.~Dick,
939:   %``Inequivalence of Jordan and Einstein frame: What is the low energy  gravity
940:   %in string theory?,''
941:   Gen.\ Rel.\ Grav.\  {\bf 30}, 435 (1998).
942:   %%CITATION = GRGVA,30,435;%%
943: 
944: \bibitem{Faraoni:1999hp}
945:   V.~Faraoni and E.~Gunzig,
946:   %``Einstein frame or Jordan frame?,''
947:   Int.\ J.\ Theor.\ Phys.\  {\bf 38}, 217 (1999)
948:   [arXiv:astro-ph/9910176].
949:   %%CITATION = IJTPB,38,217;%%
950: 
951: % phantoms
952: 
953: \bibitem{Caldwell:1999ew}
954:   R.~R.~Caldwell,
955:   %``A Phantom Menace?,''
956:   Phys.\ Lett.\  B {\bf 545}, 23 (2002)
957:   [arXiv:astro-ph/9908168].
958:   %%CITATION = PHLTA,B545,23;%%
959: 
960: \bibitem{Gibbons:2003yj}
961:   G.~W.~Gibbons,
962:   %``Phantom matter and the cosmological constant,''
963:   arXiv:hep-th/0302199.
964:   %%CITATION = HEP-TH/0302199;%%
965: 
966: \bibitem{Nojiri:2003vn}
967:   S.~Nojiri and S.~D.~Odintsov,
968:   %``Quantum deSitter cosmology and phantom matter,''
969:   Phys.\ Lett.\  B {\bf 562}, 147 (2003)
970:   [arXiv:hep-th/0303117].
971:   %%CITATION = PHLTA,B562,147;%%
972: 
973: \bibitem{Dabrowski:2003jm}
974:   M.~P.~Dabrowski, T.~Stachowiak and M.~Szydlowski,
975:   %``Phantom cosmologies,''
976:   Phys.\ Rev.\  D {\bf 68}, 103519 (2003)
977:   [arXiv:hep-th/0307128].
978:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D68,103519;%%
979: 
980: % phantoms and ghosts are bad
981: 
982: \bibitem{Cline:2003gs}
983:   J.~M.~Cline, S.~Jeon and G.~D.~Moore,
984:   %``The phantom menaced: Constraints on low-energy effective ghosts,''
985:   Phys.\ Rev.\  D {\bf 70}, 043543 (2004)
986:   [arXiv:hep-ph/0311312].
987:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D70,043543;%%
988: 
989: \bibitem{Rubakov:2006pn}
990:   V.~A.~Rubakov,
991:   %``Phantom without UV pathology,''
992:   Theor.\ Math.\ Phys.\  {\bf 149}, 1651 (2006)
993:   [Teor.\ Mat.\ Fiz.\  {\bf 149}, 409 (2006)]
994:   [arXiv:hep-th/0604153].
995:   %%CITATION = TMFZA,149,409;%%
996: 
997: %%%% Gdot constraints
998: 
999: 
1000: % Cassini
1001: 
1002: \bibitem{Bertotti:2003rm}
1003:   B.~Bertotti, L.~Iess and P.~Tortora,
1004:   %``A test of general relativity using radio links with the Cassini
1005:   %spacecraft,''
1006:   Nature {\bf 425}, 374 (2003).
1007:   %%CITATION = NATUA,425,374;%%
1008: 
1009: % Lunar ranging
1010: 
1011: \bibitem{Williams:1995nq}
1012:   J.~G.~Williams, X.~X.~Newhall and J.~O.~Dickey,
1013:   %``Relativity parameters determined from lunar laser ranging,''
1014:   Phys.\ Rev.\  D {\bf 53}, 6730 (1996).
1015:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D53,6730;%%
1016: 
1017: % everything
1018: 
1019: \bibitem{Chiba:2001ui}
1020:   T.~Chiba,
1021:   %``Constancy of the constants of nature,''
1022:   arXiv:gr-qc/0110118.
1023:   %%CITATION = GR-QC/0110118;%%
1024: 
1025: %% neutron stars
1026: 
1027: \bibitem{Thorsett:1996fr}
1028:   S.~E.~Thorsett,
1029:   %``The Gravitational Constant, the Chandrasekhar Limit, and Neutron Star
1030:   %Masses,''
1031:   Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf 77}, 1432 (1996)
1032:   [arXiv:astro-ph/9607003].
1033:   %%CITATION = PRLTA,77,1432;%%
1034: 
1035: % CMB
1036: 
1037: \bibitem{Zahn:2002rr}
1038:   O.~Zahn and M.~Zaldarriaga,
1039:   %``Probing the Friedmann equation during recombination with future CMB
1040:   %experiments,''
1041:   Phys.\ Rev.\  D {\bf 67}, 063002 (2003)
1042:   [arXiv:astro-ph/0212360].
1043:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D67,063002;%%
1044: 
1045: 
1046: %%% strong gravity etc
1047: 
1048: \bibitem{Luty}
1049:   M.~A.~Luty, M.~Porrati and R.~Rattazzi,
1050:   %``Strong interactions and stability in the DGP model,''
1051:   JHEP {\bf 0309}, 029 (2003)
1052:   [arXiv:hep-th/0303116].
1053:   %%CITATION = JHEPA,0309,029;%%
1054: 
1055: %%%% dilaton
1056: 
1057: \bibitem{Damour:1994zq}
1058:   T.~Damour and A.~M.~Polyakov,
1059:   %``The String Dilaton And A Least Coupling Principle,''
1060:   Nucl.\ Phys.\  B {\bf 423}, 532 (1994)
1061:   [arXiv:hep-th/9401069].
1062:   %%CITATION = NUPHA,B423,532;%%
1063: 
1064: %%%% Slinky
1065: 
1066: \bibitem{Barenboim:2005np} 
1067: G.~Barenboim and J.~D.~Lykken,  
1068: %``Slinky inflation,'' 
1069: Phys.\ Lett.\  B {\bf 633}, 453 (2006)  
1070: [arXiv:astro-ph/0504090]. 
1071: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B633,453;%%
1072: 
1073: \bibitem{Barenboim:2006rx}  
1074: G.~Barenboim and J.~D.~Lykken,  
1075: %``Minimal noncanonical cosmologies,''  
1076: JHEP {\bf 0607}, 016 (2006) 
1077: [arXiv:astro-ph/0604528].  
1078: %%CITATION = JHEPA,0607,016;%%
1079: 
1080: \bibitem{Barenboim:2006jh}  
1081: G.~Barenboim and J.~D.~Lykken,  
1082: %``Colliders as a simultaneous probe of supersymmetric dark matter and 
1083: %Terascale cosmology,'' 
1084: JHEP {\bf 0612}, 005 (2006)  
1085: [arXiv:hep-ph/0608265]. 
1086: %%CITATION = JHEPA,0612,005;%%
1087: 
1088: \bibitem{Barenboim:2007tu}
1089:   G.~Barenboim and J.~D.~Lykken,
1090:   %``Quintessence, inflation and baryogenesis from a single
1091:   %pseudo-Nambu-Goldstone boson,''
1092:   arXiv:0707.3999 [astro-ph].
1093:   %%CITATION = ARXIV:0707.3999;%%
1094: 
1095: %%% cluster tests of modified gravity
1096: 
1097: \bibitem{Zhang:2007nk}
1098:   P.~Zhang, aff, R.~Bean and S.~Dodelson,
1099:   %``A discriminating probe of gravity at cosmological scales,''
1100:   arXiv:0704.1932 [astro-ph].
1101:   %%CITATION = ARXIV:0704.1932;%%
1102: 
1103: \bibitem{Schmidt:2007vj}
1104:   F.~Schmidt, M.~Liguori and S.~Dodelson,
1105:   %``Galaxy-CMB Cross-Correlation as a Probe of Alternative Models of Gravity,''
1106:   Phys.\ Rev.\  D {\bf 76}, 083518 (2007)
1107:   [arXiv:0706.1775 [astro-ph]].
1108:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D76,083518;%%
1109: 
1110: %% dark energy task force
1111: 
1112: \bibitem{Albrecht:2006um}
1113:   A.~Albrecht {\it et al.},
1114:   %``Report of the Dark Energy Task Force,''
1115:   arXiv:astro-ph/0609591.
1116:   %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH/0609591;%%
1117: 
1118: 
1119: %%% reconstructing the scalar-tensor theory from luminosity-distance
1120: 
1121: \bibitem{Boisseau:2000pr}
1122:   B.~Boisseau, G.~Esposito-Farese, D.~Polarski and A.~A.~Starobinsky,
1123:   %``Reconstruction of a scalar-tensor theory of gravity in an accelerating
1124:   %universe,''
1125:   Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf 85}, 2236 (2000)
1126:   [arXiv:gr-qc/0001066].
1127:   %%CITATION = PRLTA,85,2236;%%
1128: 
1129: \bibitem{Capozziello:2007iu}
1130:   S.~Capozziello, S.~Nesseris and L.~Perivolaropoulos,
1131:   %``Reconstruction of the Scalar-Tensor Lagrangian from a LCDM Background   and
1132:   %Noether Symmetry,''
1133:   arXiv:0705.3586 [astro-ph].
1134:   %%CITATION = ARXIV:0705.3586;%%
1135: 
1136: % scalar-tensor inflation
1137: 
1138: \bibitem{GarciaBellido:1995fz}
1139:   J.~Garcia-Bellido and D.~Wands,
1140:   %``Constraints from inflation on scalar - tensor gravity theories,''
1141:   Phys.\ Rev.\  D {\bf 52}, 6739 (1995)
1142:   [arXiv:gr-qc/9506050].
1143:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D52,6739;%%
1144: 
1145: \bibitem{Linde:1993cn}
1146:   A.~D.~Linde,
1147:   %``Hybrid inflation,''
1148:   Phys.\ Rev.\  D {\bf 49}, 748 (1994)
1149:   [arXiv:astro-ph/9307002].
1150:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D49,748;%%
1151: 
1152: 
1153: \end{thebibliography}
1154: \end{document}
1155: % ------------------------------------------------------------------------
1156: